Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 09:30:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> To: imp@bsdimp.com Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_shutdown.c Message-ID: <200410041630.i94GUs7H050892@gw.catspoiler.org> In-Reply-To: <20041004.095538.105191591.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4 Oct, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <200410041313.i94DDN1w064795@repoman.freebsd.org>
> Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> : phk 2004-10-04 13:13:23 UTC
> :
> : FreeBSD src repository
> :
> : Modified files:
> : sys/kern kern_shutdown.c
> : Log:
> : Change the perfectly precise message
> : printf("No buffers busy after final sync");
> : to
> : printf("All buffers synced.");
> : in order to not leave the users wondering if there should be.
I was going to suggest "All buffers previously synced." as being more
precise, or maybe "Buffers already synced", but I didn't want to start
another bikeshed discussion.
> Any not reason to delete
> printf("All buffers synced.");
> entirely?
When I added the syncer code to (hopefully) do the final sync as part of
the syncer shutdown, I added this alternative printf so that the
"normal" shutdown sequence could be distinguished from the unexpected
case. Without this change, boot() would always have printed
"Syncing disks, buffers remaining... 0"
One could make the argument for being silent in the "normal" case and
only printing a message when something unexpected occurs, but I think
this would also apply to most of the other kernel shutdown messages.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200410041630.i94GUs7H050892>